Sometimes words just pour out of me when I type. Other times, I hesitate. Reviewing THE HOBBIT: AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY requires an approach unusual for me after twelve years contributing to TheOneRing.net. I let things gestate for several days, really, so as to refine my thoughts. The first part of this review will be blissfully *spoiler free* for those who don't want to know the big changes; but after a warning I'll get into the nitty-gritty with loads of spoilers.

I've been as excited as anybody, truthfully. THE HOBBIT: AUJ has *finally* come to the big screen - envisioned by the capable hands of a crafty Kiwi director, backed up by a super-group of WETA designers, enhanced by New Zealand's gorgeous vistas.

Jackson, a fine fellow fan of the phantasmagorical (by that I mean he's embraced his Inner Geek like the rest of us), really brought the goods with THE LORD OF THE RINGS. Three excursions to the cinema over three years... and we quite devoured them. They were so Hobbity good. There was a bit of grousing from the balcony of hardcore book-fans (something about character and plot changes), but PJ's vision was ultimately embraced by the majority. The fans couldn't have been louder or more jubilant than when, during our ROTK Oscar Party, the winner for Best Picture was announced. The phrase "Trust in PJ" is one of the most common on our message boards - a roundly agreed upon sentiment.

After years of fretting the damn thing wouldn't get made at all, indeed Bilbo has arrived! Can I get an 'amen' up in here? We've waited so long to return to the power and majesty of that LOTR Trilogy - but is THE HOBBIT: AUJ that movie? Well, yes and no (don't you just hate that dreaded cliche in a review? Thus my hesitation before writing).

This adaptation has a slightly different vibe. This filmic Hobbit is light-on-its-feet, less driven by harsh crises, more keen to savor a moment of literary indulgence than to rush. Hard to come up with the right analogy but on December 5th I tweeted:

The body of work J.R.R. Tolkien left us with came from different points in his life, and perhaps shows different approaches in authorship. Certainly we know the difference in tone between LOTR and its lovely prelude. "The Hobbit" was always a lighter affair - an episodic children's novel that goes from super-quaint to superbly epic while never losing its elan. On the other hand, the War of the Ring has heavier gravity, bigger stakes. The Professor's Trilogy hits you emotionally in a way that never leaves you. Jackson's 3 films succeeded enough in the fidelity department to do much the same for the heartstrings.

To all of you expecting THE HOBBIT: AUJ to have major upheavals, multiple character deaths (Gandalf, Boromir), etc., the kind that left you crying and thunderstruck watching THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING in 2001, expect instead a more comfortable walking pace, with less bombast and careening around the story. I believe most fans will really enjoy it, but don't expect lighting in a bottle twice.

I saw it projected in the regular 24fps, in 3D, having already seen 10 minutes of High Frame Rate 48fps at this summer's CinemaCon [story here]. Read that story from April to get a whiff of how the high-frame rate technology was presented to the industry, and my first reaction to it.

The Cast really shines. Jackson's knack for finding the right people for the part impresses still. There's fine onscreen magic just from the thespian point of view, regardless of CGI marvels, creatures, and swooping 3D goblin tunnels. Martin Freeman is so wonderful as Bilbo Baggins, you miss him when he's offscreen. Freeman has enough pluck to carry us forward in this trilogy, just as his character must for Thorin & Company.

This ensemble is par-excellence! Lordy they are so very good! Richard Armitage intensely brings to life a Thorin Oakenshield with a heavy past, exile writ on his face like iron hammers of pain. What can be said of Gandalf the Grey? ...except he is perfectly encapsulated by Sir Ian McKellen, so avuncular and wise. The man was born for the part. The Company of Dwarves are funny, amiable, and fill the camera with constant activity. They are strongly designed and individualized by their styles, yet half of them get more dialogue than others it seems. Maybe this will balance out more in future installments.

Oh Andy. Andy frackin' Serkis. Oh man oh man oh man, Andy Andy Andy Serkis. If you're a fan like me who can't get enough of Gollum, the one from THE TWO TOWERS who went schizo - repulsing us and equally endearing us with his inward dialogue - then you are going to love the Riddle Game sequence. A new category: Motion Capture Performance Award, simply *must* be created by the Academy. If Andy Serkis' work continues in this trajectory without being properly recognized by Oscar, there will be blood on the streets of Hollywood before it's over. I mean it. Here the genius of combining Andy and WETA's animators shines like never before. Bravo!

Musical contributions from Howard Shore are lovely yet the only new theme that presents itself as a centerpiece is the Dwarves' song of the Lonely Mountain, an instant favorite since the teaser trailer first appeared. The design and weapons and effects team at WETA has again come through with a miracle of Middle-earth. I can see and feel Alan Lee and John Howe all over the place. The design of Erebor is just nuts. I loved it.

Just give Andrew Lesnie every gold statuette there is. Oscar gold was forged by Dwarves just for him and his stunning camerawork. The unusual saturation of gold colors stark against shadows in a wide battlefield was memorable. My favorite shot of the film: the camera follows the fireplace in Bag End, pans up to the mortar chimney outside, surrounded by grass growing over The Hill, while flickering embers rise up into the midnight sheen and disappear against a vault of stars. It is such a quiet moment (the film takes only a few), simple and lingering, that somehow it reminded me of the peace given to me by reading Tolkien.

There are moments in the film that work so well, you may find yourself wishing the entire running time had been filled with such "perfectly tuned" bits. Perceptive viewers will realize this HOBBIT screenplay was approached very differently than LOTR. In that Trilogy, they had to trim, edit, and compress Tolkien's sprawling books into succinctly buttoned-up core moments of drama, moving swiftly on to the next thing. Here however, the writers are doing the opposite - expanding and adding beyond the book. The results feels a bit different, but you're definitely still in the gorgeous and familiar arms of Tolkien's Middle-earth, as envisioned by PJ and WETA.

Overall this film is an agreeably entertaining affair that methinks might be at a wee disadvantage: having to be constantly compared to the Trilogy before it, thus giving people certain expectations. If you walk in expecting something hewn closer to the book's tone, light-hearted and winking, instead of the sturm und drang of LOTR, you'll quite enjoy yourself. Admittedly the ending feels like a long Second Act, and you're wondering where the Third Act might be in this narrative; and the answer is delayed until next year. THE HOBBIT: THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG is already on my mind more than any other film.

You know the old adage in Hollywood: "Always leave 'em wanting more."

---------------------------------------------------------

So here ends my spoiler-free section of the review. From here on forward, I will take a fine-toothed comb to the standout moments. STOP READING NOW IF YOU DON'T WANT SPOILERS.

~

~

~

~

~

~

*Last chance!* Do you want to enjoy the movie fresh on its own terms or not? ......... LAST WARNING BEFORE SPOILER CITY

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

Okay here we go. I am happy to report there are long stretches of THE HOBBIT: AUJ directly from the book. I say a full and hearty "Good on ya" to Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and PJ. However, I wonder what is genuinely left of Guillermo del Toro's material? Regardless, this kind of fidelity to Tolkien is greatly pleasing. It looks like there is apparent care to keep canon in so many compositions and discussions amongst the characters. All very rich indeed.

However, there are new things you've never seen in the original "The Hobbit:"

Radagast the Brown and the remarkable Bunny Sled

Rhosgobel getting quasi-attacked by spiders

A Ringwraith appearing out of a statue in Dol Guldur

Azog on a vengeance-quest, hunting Thorin all across Eriador

The White Council having an impromptu meeting

The Stone Giants peeling themselves off the mountainside and hurling massive boulders at one another, Thorin & Company spectacularly caught in the madness of it

Slow-motion memories of brutal war of the Dwarves and Orcs outside Moria

The Great Goblin sending his evil scribe in a basket contraption to go inform other Orcs about their captives

Evidence of farmers or other inhabitants anywhere near the Trollshaws

Gandalf sending a moth to inform the great Eagles of their fiery predicament

Almost to letter "p" in the alphabet. And since this movie is 2 hours, 47 minutes long you will certainly face having to "p" during your screening, so I'll spare you the extra "p."

So you can see there are many departures from the book. Do they sit well overall? Do they feel natural to, and therefore part of, this Middle-earth? For the most part I say "Hell yeah, this is good stuff, right from Tolkien!" Especially intriguing is Old Bilbo (the endearing Sir Ian Holm) delivering the tragic history of Erebor in the opening prologue. The design of the Great Gate of the Lonely Mountain, and the one dragon's leg we do get to see, thrilled me to no end.

However, not all of it works for me 100%. It feels a bit strange having Azog show up as a "constant pursuer." He and his Orc pack are analogous to the Black Riders in FOTR closing in on Arwen and Frodo. Then Radagast shows up offering himself as a distraction, in a chase set-piece meant to boost up a rather relaxed storyline. I mean, come on, it's about 1 hour, 40 minutes into the flick before we reach Rivendell. I noticed a few places where the writers strained to inject some energy into the narrative; and Azog becomes the instrument of that, without any other major villain in the film. We certainly do have to wait a long year for Smaug to show up in full glory in the next installment.

One more thing that bothered me was Radagast being able to see a manifestation of a Nazgul spirit, exactly as Frodo had seen them in FOTR. Given that a writer of speculative fiction always must follow strict rules of magic (or science fiction) when inventing a secondary world, like Tolkien did, this bit might qualify as a mistake in continuity. In the original LOTR Trilogy, Frodo could only see the Nazgul in their frightening spectral form, as Kings of Old, when he put on the Ring (remember Weathertop?). But here one of them manifests right out of a Dol Guldur statue, carrying a Morgul Blade, and Radagast sees it plain as day - then flees for his life. The animal-friendly Brown Wizard is not wearing any Ring of Power, is he, so how can he seem them like that? I'm scratching my head about that one, but this is what we geeks think about. Hehehehe. Ephemera of Tolkien clashes with ephemera of Jackson.

Especially pleasing is the brief appearance of Lee Pace as the Elven-king Thranduil, father of Legoloas Greenleaf. Such a striking tableaux is created where Thranduil is first seen, and it resonates a bit of a Hayao Miyazaki feel. For a brief second I felt I was seeing Prince Ashitaka riding his red elk in PRINCESS MONONOKE.

The appearance of Sir Christopher Lee as Saruman the White, before he becomes a traitor, is also immensely gratifying. This legendary actor is one of my favorites, the greatest veteran of cinema with more film credits than any other actor (by far), and he brings us just the right shade of "might-be-evil-might-be-good." They designed his beard just a little bit darker, a nice touch, but you can see how Saruman is trying to coax the White Council into apathy, which rings quite true to the material in the Appendices of ROTK.

I wish that more than half of the Dwarves could have had dialogue. The lion's share is all Thorin and Balin (a terrific Ken Stott), but come on! Stephen Hunter, as Bombur, had not a single line at all. Not one spoken word. Dori, played by the wonderful Mark Hadlow, has all but two sentences onscreen. That's it. I was hoping Oin (John Callen) would have something pithy to say about his ear horn, but alas. Ki­li (Aiden Turner) and Fi­li (Dean O'Gorman) get all the good stuff in the Troll sequence, Bofur (James Nesbitt) gets a wonderful moment of dialogue right before the Goblin-town scene. Wishful thinking to get more than three or four lines out of Gimli's father, Gloin (Peter Hambleton)! All of these personalities are definitely a lot to squeeze in, but since we've got 3 hours of breathing space, I figured something from all of them would be given a chance to shine through, or just poke up into the light, for a bit.

There's more to come, and that's the bottom line. Two more films - and perhaps when we are all done - we'll be able to judge all six films of a piece.

The best parts of THE HOBBIT: AUJ are meant to satisfy fans of the books, that is evident. If you're a Ringer fan like I am, you'll love when the filmmakers' linger in the comfortable nooks and corners of Tolkien's world. This material is tailor-made for you. The payoff is given in small, savory moments that add up to a truer whole.

Can I ask you when you did see the shot of Thorin smithing ? I missed that one..Was it between the wide shot of the exode and the one with Thorin on the edge of a "mountain" ?

And I am still not certain it was a Nazgűl we saw. Of course he wields a morgul blade, but as you stated, the fact that Radagast and we, the audience could see him without the use of a ring is quite puzzling. Maybe it's because he takes a lot of drugs...who knows. But we should have seen the Nazgűl from Radagast point of view then...

No seriously I just checked elk in english, and for me it's more like a deer.

So why is it awesome ?

Well first I am a huge fan of Mononoke . But the tru reason is that I find natural for elves to interact with wildlife. In Rivendel and in Lorien we saw no animals at all. It looked more like a Disney compound than a settlement integrated in its environement with as little impact as possible.

on wild boars...Also screams awesome. IMO, it's really the only animal they can look bad*** mounted on. For some reason, a cavalry of dwarves on ponies sits wrong in my stomach. As does a full army of dwarves on foot.

(Subject line edited for spoilers) "You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"

pull sleds. If it has a neck mane it's an elk.. oh right we're talking about elves and hobbits. Anyway thanks to these reviewers for bucking up my enthusiasim.Sounds like PJ has struck the right balance.

Great review! Wanted to comment on one thing for now, since studying for finals
[In reply to]

Can't Post

Radagast, Gandalf, Saruman, they're not human. We don't really know what they can and cannot see, but it's not stretching credulity to say they probably can see more than us mere mortals, since they're primarily spirit-beings. So, it doesn't surprise me at all that Raddy can see a Wraith (which is a creation of another one of their kin, Sauron) without a Ring. Arthur: What manner of man are you that can summon up fire without flint or tinder? Tim: I... am an enchanter. Arthur: By what name are you known? Tim: There are some who call me... 'Tim'...? Arthur: ...greetings, Tim the Enchanter.

Just so they get a little love, the more accurate descriptors are fierce, protective, highly intelligent, tough, and more often to charge than flee. All perfectly Dwarf.

BTW pigs don't roll around in their own filth, in fact they are the only domesticated livestock that won't stand or lay where they defecate. They wallow in mud because the cooling effect of evaporation as the mud dries makes up for the lack of sweat glands.

As someone who has hunted boar and raised hogs, I had to throw them some props.

In FotR we can only see the Wraiths in their true form from Frodo's point of view. If the shot is from the point of view of say Aragorn we just see a cloaked Nazgűl. In the Hobbit, the scene with the Wraith is seen from a neutral point of view, so nothing indicates that it is a kind of invisible spirit that only Radagast can see. It just looks like a typical ghost... That's the problem It is like if when Bilbo or Frodo wear the ring we saw the world as they see it even from others perspective. If that makes sens...

Radagast is one of the Maiar, so he can see the "wraith-world". He lives in both "worlds", as Glorfindel in the book.

This is surely the right answer.

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarﬁn and his house.

The state I am in has a terrible problem with feral hogs. They are now estimated between 2-3 million population and do about 1 billion a year in agricultural and environmental damage. Their need to wallow just destroys creek, stream, and small river banks and causes terrible erosion. They will completely root up and destroy crops and edge out all other indigenous wildlife. They are prolific breeders and there aren't any natural predators so coming across one is more common than would think in some areas. I probably come across one or more at least a couple times a month. Always a little scary as they will flee but just as often be aggressive. Most other wildlife including bears will almost always flee unless young are endangered. They are very intelligent but can be very nasty and have an aggressive streak.

I do agree, Elk and all deer are much more beautiful and fit Elves nicely but wild hog is so very much Dwarf because of fierceness and temperament.

As awesome as it is, I don't want to see an elvish cavalery on deers at the BotFA...

And also I wanted to say that Thranduil riding a deer makes the rumors about a dwarven cavalery on wild boars more believable...We'll see in the next two instalments.

Like deer themselves, both elk (wapiti) and moose, and for that matter reindeer (caribou), are all cervids. They vary signifcantly in size and range, and somewhat in appearance. All have antlers, not horns.

An elk is really Cervus canadensis. It can weigh up to 1,300 pounds, which is simply huge. A moose, Alces alces, can outweigh them, normally being up to 1,500 pounds with one record of 1,800 pounds and several unsubstantiated reports of even larger, perhaps as high as 2,600 pounds. A moose really is a deer built to pachydermal proportions, and an elk is not far behind.

In contrast, the little white-tailed deer of eastern forests, Odocoileus virginianus, is only around 300 pounds and usually less, while his western cousin, the black-tail or mule deer, Odocoileus hemionus, can be as big as 450 pounds. Still, deer are much, much smaller than elk, and would never be confused the one for the other. They simply look different.

The elk has pointy antlers, whereas the moose has flattish shovel-looking antlers. Roughly the same size as a moose and combining aspects of both is the “recently” extinct Irish Elk, Megaloceros giganteus. That’s the one I’d’ve picked for the Elf-king’s mount.

You can tell the difference by the antlers: which kind were they?

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarﬁn and his house.